THE MARRIAGE QUESTION 227

therefore, they accepted the amendment with the mental reser-
vation that the adjective "monogamous" would by law still exclude
the women married according to the rites of these two great reli-
gions, they certainly misled Parliament and the Indian commu-
nity. We think that the Supreme Court will reject the Govern-
ment interpretation, but, should its decision be otherwise, it cer-
tainly will be necessary to alter the Immigration Act in order
to clothe all Indian marriages with legality. Even at this eleventh
hour, the Government could withdraw the case and not challenge
a decision.

Then, there remained the question of the admission of plural
wives as distinguished from their legal status after admission.
The practice has been always to admit such wives of domiciled
Indians. In the Transvaal such unions are even noted on the
registration certificates. The first shock of disturbance in this
practice was felt in 1911 by a decision of Justice Wessels,1 which,
too, was invited by the Government. As a result of the decision,
the British Indian Association carried on correspondence with
the Government and an assurance was given by them that all cases
of hardship would be considered by them. This correspondence
seemed to settle the question, for the Indian demand as to plural
wives is not for legal recognition but for admission into the Union
of the existing plural wives of domiciled Indians. But the disposi-
tion of the Government seems to be now to recede from the as-
surance contained in their communication. We shall reproduce this
correspondence in our next issue so that the reader may judge
for himself whether the correspondence can bear any other inter-
pretation than that put upon it by the community*

To sum up, then, the demands of the community are simple
and three-fold:

(1) Legalization of monogamous marriages already celebra-
ted and to be celebrated in South Africa; (2) The term "mono-
gamous" to include marriages celebrated according to the rites of
religions that may not prohibit polygamy, so long as the woman
whose union is to be recognized is the only wife of her hus-
band; (3) the admission of existing plural wives of domiciled
Indians without granting such wives a legal status apart from full
residential rights.

Indian Opinion, 1-10-1913

1 F«fe VoL XI, pp. 120 & 122.